What Jarad wrote above, if expressed quantitatively, would qualify as a theory, but I've not seen anyone get to that stage of explanation yet. At best, it's a hypothetical idea, and testable only in a general sense.

It doesn't seem that it would be difficult at this point to make specific hypotheses and do rigorous testing on them. If that's what Rossi's doing, great -- more power to him. But that's not what he's showing to the scientific community.

What he meant: I can't present an objective rebuttal to the article so, I'll simply dismiss it.

What he wrote:

so typical of the hubris from the physics community (most of whom wouldn't recognize a genuine idea if it bit them),

What he meant: The overwhelming majority of scientists who understand this subject don't agree with me so, I'll simply dismiss them.

What he wrote:

from 12 years ago yet, isn't worth rebutting.

What he meant: Just in case people catch on to the fact that I have no rational rebuttal to the article, I'll dismiss it as being old; ignoring the fact that cogent, rational analysis becomes neither less cogent nor less rational with age.

What he wrote:

Suffice it to say that the experiments and ideas are far more sophisticated than Mr. Raymo.

What he meant: I can't win an argument with Raymo so, I'll insult him. Hopefully, this will dissuade people from focusing on the rational analysis in his article.

Bill in Flag

I'm tired of presenting the same links to the same completely open information all the time. It doesn't matter - we live in anti-scientific times despite all the "scientism", which is what I call aping of the forms without the content.

In the past when truly new and novel ideas have come along the establishment has been rather skeptical (and in many cases warranted, I dare say in MOST cases). But there are a few cases where the new idea carries the day (kind like winning the lottery with similar odds) so everyone that thinks they have a new understanding feel that their idea is the one true truth.

Time will tell. The attacks on the theories have a purpose. Ideas that stand the test endure, those that don't join the dust heap. It matters not what we think of the matter. We can't prove or disprove it here, it can only be done in the lab.

So make some fresh popcorn and see what the labs come up with. Make yourself comfortable; it's going to be a spell.

There are no actual theories to attack, and the Widom-Larsen ideas are not to be regarded as a theory of cold fusion yet. Instead, a zillion experiments need to happen first. Superconductivity did not just spring into the world overnight. An actual theory that was based on an definite new phenomenon was not formed until the 1950s, 70 years after the first experiments in low-temperature conductivity. The same is true of semi-conductivity, which was discovered in the 1920s and lay dormant and ignored for 30 years.

The army of bad physicists one sees on TV and in print have got the lay public completely bamboozled about how science actually works. I doubt that most of those people could even visit a real lab without breaking something.

In the past when truly new and novel ideas have come along the establishment has been rather skeptical (and in many cases warranted, I dare say in MOST cases). But there are a few cases where the new idea carries the day (kind like winning the lottery with similar odds) so everyone that thinks they have a new understanding feel that their idea is the one true truth.

Time will tell. The attacks on the theories have a purpose. Ideas that stand the test endure, those that don't join the dust heap. It matters not what we think of the matter. We can't prove or disprove it here, it can only be done in the lab.

So make some fresh popcorn and see what the labs come up with. Make yourself comfortable; it's going to be a spell.

There are no actual theories to attack, and the Widom-Larsen ideas are not to be regarded as a theory of cold fusion yet. Instead, a zillion experiments need to happen first. Superconductivity did not just spring into the world overnight. An actual theory that was based on an definite new phenomenon was not formed until the 1950s, 70 years after the first experiments in low-temperature conductivity. The same is true of semi-conductivity, which was discovered in the 1920s and lay dormant and ignored for 30 years.

The army of bad physicists one sees on TV and in print have got the lay public completely bamboozled about how science actually works. I doubt that most of those people could even visit a real lab without breaking something.

-drl

We don't need a 'correct' theory about how cold fusion works.

We just need a working model that is reproduceable with consistent, measureable results. How the darn thing works can come later.

The E-Cat is a joke until such time as it can be examined in detail and reproduced from patents. How come it is not patened technology yet? They have customers (supposedly). All one customer has to do is open it up and reverse engineer it and steal the technology.

I use to rpactice as a magician a long time ago. Uri Geller fooled distinguished scientists that he, indeed, possesed 'magical powers' to bend spoons and noted scientists attested to that fact.

It took another magician, Amazing Randi, to show how easily the scientists were fooled.

Pesse (The E-Cat is as real as a perpetual motion machine until they file a patent.) Mist

I think that there is some evidence suggesting that something is going on to produce extra heat in some cases.

I think the Widom Larson hypothesis is one possible explanation.

I am encouraged when people at NASA indicate that they will look at this in a systematic way to try to actually understand it. By systematic, I mean designing experiments to vary the conditions and carefully examine the results - not just was there extra heat, but measuring radiation, isotopes, etc., and examining exactly when and where any reactions occur (throughout the metal? at certain intervals? only on the surface?). If it is real, it is probably not trivial, and this will take a careful and systematic approach to figure it out.

I do not think Rossi has done this - black box experiments don't qualify as systematic study, and won't clarify what's going on.

I hope that there is something to this - we could really use it. But I consider it an unproven hypothesis at this point. I think the potential gain is worth putting in some systematic research. I hope NASA or other reputable groups will do that.

deSitter, have patience. Looks like we have a good 30 to 70 years to wait before it becomes mainstream if true. Perhaps less if not. Raising your voice in the hopes that people will understand is not unlike raising your voice to someone that does not speak English in the hope that it will help them understand you better.

I want to say to those strident and benighted autocratic "defenders of the faith", which is after all what they are - the faith being in their own infallibility - I want to say with Cromwell, "I beseech you in the bowels of Einstein, think it possible that you may be mistaken".

You're quite right Danny, I might be wrong, but when it comes to Cold Fusion, I'm not optimistic about it. As far as the E-Cat, it makes that little alarm in the back of my mind go off, the alarm of a swindler in our midst.

I will say it - the magic box is a JOKE.Come on! As a non-scientist person that has street smarts, trust me this is a scam. Let's see.... have the answer to the World's energy problems and would be given the Nobel (which comes with a million bucks) and gain worldwide fame, TV interviews, book deals, but no, gonna keep to myself...right...

I will say it - the magic box is a JOKE.Come on! As a non-scientist person that has street smarts, trust me this is a scam. Let's see.... have the answer to the World's energy problems and would be given the Nobel (which comes with a million bucks) and gain worldwide fame, TV interviews, book deals, but no, gonna keep to myself...right...

Not to mention that without patents someone can 'invent' the thing again and steal all the thunder.

In regard to LENR's I hope it is just perfecting the crystal lattice of the7 Palladium hydride (examination of 'working' cells reveals localized hot spots where fusion supposedly took place). Perhaps the lattice was perfectly formed in these areas and flawed in most others?

Of course, they are also discussing these compounds for use as gas tanks in hydrogen powered vehicles.

Pesse (I can imagine that regular is hydrogen while deuterium is hi-test at the gas pump of the future) Mist

Not to mention that without patents someone can 'invent' the thing again and steal all the thunder.

Not in most of the world. If the design is published, Rossi as inventor can choose either to patent it or not. If not, nobody else can patent it either, because the design is now "prior art". (Others can sell items based on the design, but they won't have exclusive rights to it).

If he keeps the details proprietary as a trade secret, that's perfectly legal (I understand that Elon Musk is doing that for some of his Merlin engine technical details rather than patenting them), but if he sells the process as nuclear fusion, and turns out that it's not, he's going to have some serious 'splainen to do.

From a business standpoint, he could probably benefit a lot more by publishing and patenting, and allowing the world to verify for itself just what's going on. If the thing actually works, that is.

A fair amount of companies don't patent because the patent papers explain how it works. Too easy to give away too much information so they avoid that up front.

My impression is that those tend to be technical details of a larger work, rather than groundbreaking new technologies of their own. Even if patented, those types of details can be vulnerable to patent challenges if they're similar to things that have already been invented. It's usually easier just to keep those secondary components out of the limelight.

But if you're talking about a revolutionary new concept that's going to change the world on its own -- well, that's a little more than the Coca-Cola recipe. It's tough to get away with a mere trade secret for something of that nature.

The problem with trying to keep something like cold fusion a trade secret is that it is simply too valuable. Someone will buy or steal a unit, cut it open, and copy it. Without any patent protection, they can then duplicate it without paying a royalty. The exact formula of Coke is a secret, but how many knock-offs are out there? Half the soda row is for various "colas" that all taste pretty much like Coke. Advertising works to get people to pay more for "the real thing" when you are talking about cola, but for cold fusion if a company can choose to pay less per kilowatt-hour, they won't care if it comes from an E-Cat or an E-CopyCat.

Which brings us back to the "publish to patent" choice, which means it can't be just a black box. There has to be a theory of operation, a method, an assembly plan, and it has to be something that can be reviewed.

If it's the real deal, others will be able to verify it, if it's not, everyone will know.

What about regulatory concerns? If Rossi really did have cold fusion working (which I'd bet everything I own he hasn't) he would have to divulge his secrets to government and regulatory bodies. As many regulations and safety protocols as there are that surround modern nuclear power, no government is going to allow someone to operate fusion based power plants without access to the implementation details. New regulations and safety protocols would have to be written, etc. No government woul simply allow Rossi free reign in opening power plants with the only input from him being " trust me, it works".

The purpose of patents is to give an inventor protected rights to his invention for a period of time.

Without them anyone can make the thing.

But no one has mentioned the key piece of evidence that marks this a fraud, not a mistake mind you, but a deliberate fraud.

The claim is that this thing creates fusion and the byproduct is transmutation of a portion of the metal into copper.

A sample of this copper was given to independant scientists who discovered that it had the exact same ratio of isotopes as naturally occuring copper. A flagrant impossibility if the E-Cat transmuted it from another metal.

The copper provided for testing came unequivically from the ground where someone dug it up and NOT from the transmutation of another metal.

This earmarks all the claims as outright fraud.

Pesse (People believe, not because they see truth but because they want to believe) Mist

A sample of this copper was given to independant scientists who discovered that it had the exact same ratio of isotopes as naturally occuring copper. A flagrant impossibility if the E-Cat transmuted it from another metal.

Thanks for bringing this up. This is a clear fingerprint to a fraud. Who did the independent analysis? Are the results fully published?

As a general rule when someone makes a claim but refuses public demonstration use the Missouri plan: SHOW ME! When someone refuses a public demonstration I do not believe their claim, whether cold fusion, a 100 mile per gallon carburettor or a cure for baldness. I have yet to be proven wrong in this philosophy.CLear skies and clean glass,Mike